Unsorted FBI Documents

Attachment to Independent Case Review Report
For CDRU # 906 case file # 95-292551 .

Material Examiner: Malone (RO)

Remarks :

Case resulted in a guilty plea, no transcript

INDEPENDENT CASE REVIEW REPORT

Independent Review conducted by: Steve Robertson

Area(s) of Expertise: Hair and Fiber

Review commenced at: ) 1 :30 AM (Time),

Examinees) & Symbols

Reviewed Not Reviewed

Reviewed Not Reviewed

Laboratory Report(s):

Materials Reviewed

Trial testimony transcripts) of: Not available

Testimony Date(s):

Laboratory Number: 00315023

Laboratory Number:

Laboratory Number:

Date: Mar 27, 1991

Examiner Bench Notes of: RQ and unknown technician

Laboratoty Number:

Page I of

CRM - 2228

Was any olher material reviewed? X Yes

□ No

Ifyes, please identify and/or describe the material: submitting agency letter dated 3-13-90

Results of Review

File#: 95-292551 Item or Specimen H Reviewed: QI-Q7

Review of Laboratory Report(s) and Bench Notes:

Note: Numbered comments are required below oron
additional pages for any “No” or “Unable to Determine” Responses

1) Did the examiner perform the appropriate tests in a scientifically acceptable manner, based on the
methods, protocols, and analytic techniques available at the time of the original examination(s)?

o Yes 0 No Xo Unable to Determine

2) Are the examination results set forth in the laboratory report(s) supported and adequately documented in

the bench notes? □ Yes Xo No o Unable to Determine

Review of Testimony:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on
additional pages for any “No” or “Unable to Determine” Responses

XXC Transcript not available.

3)

Testimony consistent with the laboratory report(s)?

O Yes

o No

o Unable to Determine

4)

Testimony consistent with the bench notes?

□ Yes

a No

□ Unable to Determine

5)

Testimony within bounds of examiner's expertise?

a Yes

□ No

o Unable to Determine

Page

of

Initials: <•}?£/(—-

Comments

(Set forth by above question #, if applicable.
Use "Additional Comments” Sheet, if needed)

File#: 95-292551

# 1 : It cannot be determined that appropriate tests were performed. Examinations were done for hair and fiber
transfers, but the basis to report the hole in the Q2 shirt is consistent with the type of hole which would be made
by the specimen Q1 knife cannot be determined.

#2: Documentation is poor. The notes are not dated and are in pencil and not ink. The characteristics that identify
the hole in the shirt as a possible stab cut are not documented, nor is the width of the knife blade. The report
correctly slates there is no association that can be made between the knife and the shirt based upon hair and fiber
evidence.

Review completed at: 12:00 PM (Time), 11/05/01 (Date)

Total time spent conducting review (to nearest 1/4 hour): 0.50 hr.

I hereby certify that I conducted this review in an independent, unbiased manner and that the results of my review
are fully documented on this report consisting of a total of 3 pages.

Page 3 of 3

Initials: